Forum name change

<b>Forum for the discussion of Applied Linguistics </b>

Moderators: Dimitris, maneki neko2, Lorikeet, Enrico Palazzo, superpeach, cecil2, Mr. Kalgukshi2

fluffyhamster
Posts: 3031
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again

Post by fluffyhamster » Thu Dec 07, 2006 2:49 am

metal56 wrote:What I mean is, there's much too much focus here on what students will need to say or write in their present or future communications in English. Very little discussion takes place on what students will encounter beyond the teacher's view of standard English. I also focus on the latter in my EFL/ESP/EAP classes. Discussing such here normally leads to the few, somewhat hard-headed teachers, ridiculing use that comes from beyond their viewpoint or to sowing doubt to an extreme level as to the usefulness of terms and other such usage that also comes from beyond that which they feel is suitable for their own context/classrooms.

I've seen more and more limitation on discussions here of late. I don't know why that has taken place, but I know the few who have helped it along. At base, they behave as closet prescripitivists and are mostly Eurocentric in their understanding of what is and is not teachable. A sad state of affairs for an Applied Linguistics forum - hence my, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, thread question.
Like it or not, metal, the students' immediate future needs are what are most pressing, and therefore at the forefront of most people's minds. It might help genuine discussion along if more of what you posted seemed functionally even remotely necessary to the average learner (yes, it's a construct of an argument), but as I at least have kept pointing out, there always seem to be alternative ways to express whatever (which rather undermines your whole recent 'Variety X lacks Y' pseudo-Whorfian waffle), but you can take the "interest", or now lack of it, as unfortunate evidence that what you have to say is "falling on deaf ears" if you want (I mean, we're all entitled to our own opinions, aren't we?).

fluffyhamster
Posts: 3031
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: UK > China > Japan > UK again

Post by fluffyhamster » Thu Dec 07, 2006 4:49 am

Or I could just direct you back to here to mull things over again, metal:
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/teacher/v ... 9443#29443

jotham
Posts: 509
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 12:51 am

Post by jotham » Thu Dec 07, 2006 5:16 am

metal56 wrote:There are many teachers who do that and still insist on "whom", for example, because they or either do not know the situation of contemporary use or they want to hide modern usage facts from learners.
The whom question is much more complex than you make it. You assume either it's used or it isn't. The devil is in the details and there are several points about it that need to be considered. 1. It is considered stilted in certain phrases, probably at the beginning of sentences, such as "who were you talking to?" and has been for at least fifty years, but doesn't preclude other uses of it. 2. It is still alive in American English than in British (probably because British academia have mainly linguist points of view.) 3. Certain phrases are set, such as "one of whom" or "all of whom"---at least in American English. 4. There is a difference between casual English and written or professional English. If we can just acknowledge this one fact alone, many squabbles just go away and die out. It isn't wrong to talk a certain way with your friends, but if you're wanting to mix with business leaders or academia, or write an article in a magazine, people will notice that you took the time to get it right and you can make a favorable impression if you just work at it a little bit---part of honing your speaking and writing skills. (You don't hone them just for your friends.) If it is taught in the classroom, the students are then given the tools they need in a professional setting if they choose. They shouldn't feel forced to use them---but we would be amiss if we didn't at least offer it to them and expose them to it. Perhaps in Great Britain, this isn't a factor. So blame it on an American-versus-British difference. There's no need to get upset about it. Has someone corrected your usage of "who"? I wouldn't have, unless you wanted to know.
Bryan Garner talks about the who and whom question in his Garner's Modern American Usage. It is good reading for all these controversial issues with common-sense solutions for both grammarians and linguists.

User avatar
Lorikeet
Posts: 1374
Joined: Sun May 18, 2003 4:14 am
Location: San Francisco, California
Contact:

Post by Lorikeet » Thu Dec 07, 2006 6:34 am

fluffyhamster wrote:Hi Lori! I'd consider arguments for using things like 'Do you like...?' > 'Yes, I do' if those in favour of them could, off the top of their heads, provide help with things like the following: Oh, don't you like/eat that (food)?' '___, I do (but I'm saving it for last!)'. I doubt if they've given anything beyond the most basic of misguided basics the thought (language has so many interconnections) it all requires and deserves.
Yes. That is what I meant. I use them too, because it is part of a larger pattern. I just let them know why I'm using it.

Do you like coffee? Yes, I do.
I like coffee and he does too.
He likes coffee, doesn't he?
Who likes coffee? I do.

Edit: Ah might have read your post too fast, but the above examples are still the reason I like to use the "yes, I do" approach too.

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Thu Dec 07, 2006 7:52 am

<It might help genuine discussion along if more of what you posted seemed functionally even remotely necessary to the average learner >

Problem is; Fluff, you decided a long time aso that this forum was only to be used to discuss language and methodology that was relevant to the average learner. You then tried at every opportunity to steer the whole forum in that direction and to working under such limitations.

<the students' immediate future needs are what are most pressing,>

Does that mean we all have to focus only on the immediate future? This is not the classroom, Fluff. One can still ponder, question, suggest a wide variety of things here without then having to immediately transfer them to the classroom. It has always seemed to me that are here because you need quick fixes for you present classes, and that's OK, but you should allow the rest to discuss what they will. Not all of us are focused on the present or on your particular students. We are here to help each other and not to train you as a teacher.
which rather undermines your whole recent 'Variety X lacks Y' pseudo-Whorfian waffle),
That it is waffle to you shows the lack of understanding of the word "linguist". Your need to impose your view of Standard English here is not good policy.
but you can take the "interest", or now lack of it
Rome wasn't built in a day, Fluff.

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Thu Dec 07, 2006 7:59 am

fluffyhamster wrote:Or I could just direct you back to here to mull things over again, metal:
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/teacher/v ... 9443#29443
You should direct your self to this site:

http://fds.oup.com/www.oup.com/pdf/elt/ ... 7598-6.pdf

Note areas which are of concern to Applied Linguistics and compare these with your interests here on this forum.

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Thu Dec 07, 2006 8:14 am

The whom question is much more complex than you make it.
I agree, but for a different reason. I talked about a ceratin group of teachers who do not see the question of "whom" as complex. They say "use it, or be seen by most people as uneducated", which in contemporary society is just not the case.

Your explanation of "whom" use is quite good and almost complete. You should send it to some of the teachers I metioned.
4. There is a difference between casual English and written or professional English. If we can just acknowledge this one fact alone, many squabbles just go away and die out.
The differences are not so well-defined in many contemporary communication contexts. You are talking about ideals, and the only way to get students to follow such ideals is to be prescriptive. And what do you mean by "professional English"?
It isn't wrong to talk a certain way with your friends, but if you're wanting to mix with business leaders or academia
I work with business leaders all-day-long and many of them use what you would call "informal English" 90% of the time. They are all very successful business people. The choice of language is not between clearly defined poles of a formal register and an informal one, it is based on a scale. Far too many teachers are not awre of that fact or try to hide the fact - too many socio-political agendas based on something that was, and is not now, the case, or on what they would like to be the case.
It isn't wrong to talk a certain way with your friends, but if you're wanting to mix with business leaders or academia, or write an article in a magazine, people will notice that you took the time to get it right and you can make a favorable impression if you just work at it a little bit---part of honing your speaking and writing skills.
We are not discussing writing skills, but we are talking about register. When you pose magazine writing as a model of formal writing and use, you seem to be focusing on the publishing industry of the past. What kind of language would you suggest your students learn for publications such as these?
1. Mizz Mag

"Mizz Mag is perfect. It has all the topics you want to read: celeb, style, fun, cringe, real life story, review, TV guide and much more! "

2. Little Manual on Science Communication – Tips for Scientists and Science Communicators.

"Avoid rococo style

Use straightforward, informal language. Remember: simple language is not incompatible with rich content."
And how about this? Do you think many ESL/EFL teachers are preparing their students, who may wish to become teachers, for this?
"Informal language is an important tool in representing mathematical ideas since it allows children to form links between their experience and mathematical problems, form relations between different mathematical ideas and clarifies their thinking processes."

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-16654586.html
The needs of ESL/EFL students are not what they were. Teachers need to keep abreast of the times in order to serve their students well. This forum needs to return to being more open regarding what is discussed and what relevance certain linguistics discussions have for some, if not all, of the teachers here.

And questions about what is relevant to students should also be questioned. Fluff's doubt-sowing question, for example, is "is this really useful or relevant to students" should many times be "is this really useful for my students" or even be presented as a statement "I think this is not useful for my students".
Last edited by metal56 on Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:30 am, edited 1 time in total.

JuanTwoThree
Posts: 947
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 11:30 am
Location: Spain

Post by JuanTwoThree » Thu Dec 07, 2006 8:58 am

We come back to the question of whether it's a) Linguistics Applied to English or b) Linguistics Applied to the Teaching of English.

Why on earth can't it be both? It's just a little bit of electronic space. The only problem could be either when a devotee of the second bleats about some discussion that seems, to them at least, to be irrelevant to teaching or when someone apparently bursts in on a chalkface discussion with a load of hypothetical waffle. Not that one person's hypothetical waffle isn't another's theoretical basis to their teaching.

You could have umpteen sections: Applied Linguistics, Linguistics Applied to Teaching English, Little Grammar Matters, Completely Ignored Requests to have Papers written for the Poster, and so on.......

Or you could just leave it like it is with all the muddle that ensues and usually gets sorted out in the end.

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:15 am

Some of them will say it's wrong because the answer has to be, "Yes, I do." I explain that both are acceptable and used, but teachers like to use the "yes I do" so students can learn about verbs. I do that too, but I let them know that "yes" (And uh-huh, mm-hmm, or a nod) can mean the same thing in a conversation.
Some teachers would say that short replies, such as "yes" and "no", can often sound abrupt or rude. What would you say to such teachers?

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:24 am

We come back to the question of whether it's a) Linguistics Applied to English or b) Linguistics Applied to the Teaching of English.

Why on earth can't it be both?
Why indeed. Linguistics, as a whole, has helped me develop as a language user and teacher. Applied Linguistics (and to a certain extent Sociolinguistics) has helped me transfer ideas/concepts to the classroom.
There's space here both to be fed, as a teacher, and to discover what and how to feed students.
Or you could just leave it like it is with all the muddle that ensues and usually gets sorted out in the end.
I'd say, of late, it doesn't get sorted. What you have is a situation when some posters make it near impossible to discuss anything that they do not see as immediately relevant to their next class, so to speak. They criticise, ridicule, divert, mock, and bring undue attention to certain posts and posters. Those people are dumbing down this forum. Many have left due to such people - I know because I get emails from a few ex-posters.

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:36 am

Bryan Garner talks about the who and whom question in his Garner's Modern American Usage. It is good reading for all these controversial issues with common-sense solutions for both grammarians and linguists.
Could you summarise his advice?

JuanTwoThree
Posts: 947
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 11:30 am
Location: Spain

Post by JuanTwoThree » Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:39 am

What would I say to such teachers? That they are right, in part. But they need to wonder why.

It took me a long time to speak Spanish and use the appropriate body language at the same time. People often frown when they are thinking hard and people are often thinking hard when speaking a foreign language.

So a good bit of pragmatic advice that teachers can give students is to pile on the words when in doubt. If the students can smile, sound jaunty, get the intonation spot on, then "Beer please mate" is fine. But if they are frowning, looking uncomfortable and sounding a bit robotic (which they may well be) then "Can I have a beer please? " gets the desired results (beer and an unupset barman) in another way.

I'm with Lorikeet. "Yes" with a nod and a smile works. "Yes, I do" without does too.

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Thu Dec 07, 2006 9:46 am

If the students can smile, sound jaunty, get the intonation spot on, then "Beer please mate" is fine. But if they are frowning, looking uncomfortable and sounding a bit robotic (which they may well be) then "Can I have a beer please? " gets the desired results (beer and an unupset barman) in another way.
Would they frown if they had been taught "Beer please, mate" or "A beer please" from the outset? I've never heard anyone use "could" in such a context in Britain.

JuanTwoThree
Posts: 947
Joined: Tue Sep 14, 2004 11:30 am
Location: Spain

Post by JuanTwoThree » Thu Dec 07, 2006 10:00 am

"Could I have a beer please?" sounds exasperated doesn't it?.

The trouble is that life's too short and you really need one expression that covers most situations, so you rule out teaching "May I" because it sounds poncey in a boozer, "Mate" because it sounds chummy outside a boozer and you end up with "Can I have a beer please?" as a sort of default option that you can't go too far wrong with, irrespective of whether the barman is wearing a grubby tea-shirt or a bow-tie. Or a grubby bow-tie.

metal56
Posts: 3032
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:30 am

Post by metal56 » Thu Dec 07, 2006 10:12 am

JuanTwoThree wrote:"Could I have a beer please?" sounds exasperated doesn't it?.

you end up with "Can I have a beer please?" as a sort of default option that you can't go too far wrong with, irrespective of whether the barman is wearing a grubby tea-shirt or a bow-tie. Or a grubby bow-tie.
A fair compromise. I'd say. Much easier here in Spain/The Basque Country where on only needs "Cerveza" or "Café con Leche" and all, or mostly all, would respond well.

Locked